Scribd
Upload
166 views

Supreme Court Case Analysis

The Supreme Court case of Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969 involved students who were suspended for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The Court ruled 7-2 that the students' First Amendment right to freedom of speech was violated when the school prohibited the symbolic protest. The ruling established that students retain their constitutional rights at school as long as their actions do not threaten to disrupt school functions or the rights of other students. The decision guaranteed students the right to peacefully protest and was an important legal precedent affirming student speech protections.

Uploaded by

ScrubRJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
166 views

Supreme Court Case Analysis

The Supreme Court case of Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969 involved students who were suspended for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The Court ruled 7-2 that the students' First Amendment right to freedom of speech was violated when the school prohibited the symbolic protest. The ruling established that students retain their constitutional rights at school as long as their actions do not threaten to disrupt school functions or the rights of other students. The decision guaranteed students the right to peacefully protest and was an important legal precedent affirming student speech protections.

Uploaded by

ScrubRJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Name: Ryan Van Patten Period: 5

Supreme Court Case Analysis Sheet (Resource)


1. Supreme Court Case:

Tinker v. Des Moines 1969

2. Background/Facts of the Case/Circumstances 3. Part of the Constitution questioned: cite and


(story of the case): In December of 1965 a group of discuss exactly which section of the Constitution the
students in Des Moine held a meeting in the home of case revolves around – provide Article, Section,
Chirstopher Eckhardt to plan a public showing of their Clause of the Constitution if possible. The part of this
support for a truce in the Vietnam War. They decided constitution that was questioned was the first
to wear black armbands through the holiday season amendment and whether the prohibition against the
and to fast on december 16th and New Year’s Eve. wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of
The principles learned of the plan and met on symbolic protest, violated the student’s freedom of
december 14th to create a policy that stated that any speech protections.
student wearing an armband would be asked to remove
it, with a refusal to do so would result in suspension.
One december 16th Mary Beth Tinker and Chirstopher
Eckhardy wore their armbands and were sent home.
The following day, the same thing happened to John
tinker. Through their parents, the student sued the
school district for violating the students’ right of
expression and sought an injunction to prevent the
school district from disciplining the students. The
district court dismissed the case and held that the
school district’s actions were reasonable to uphold
school discipline. The U.S court of Appeals for the
Eight circuit affirmed the decision. without opinion.

4. Chief Justice: Earl Warren 5. Year: 1968

6. What would you decide? 8. Legal Impact of the Decision: (what is the
I think that the school entirely violated the students significance of this case? Why is it important
right to protest, especially since the protest posed no legally?) The significance of this case is that it
threat to the students themselves, others, or property. guaranteed the student the right to peacefully protest,
at least symbolically, as long as it didn’t pose a threat
to the schools functions or other students.

7. Court decision(s)/Rationale: Why did they rule


that way? The supreme court held that the armbands
Name: Ryan Van Patten Period: 5
represented pure speech that is entirely separate from 9. Do you agree with the outcome? Why? I do agree
the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The with the outcome because I think it’s important to
court also held that the students did not lose their First be able to protest things you deem unconstitutional
Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they or unlawful, which was a sentiment surrounding
stepped on to school property. The court sided with the vietnam war. Especially as a student sometimes
Tinker in a 7-2 vote. your opinions are swept under the rug due to being
“too young” to understand.

Go to this site for more detailed information about the court cases. Scroll down to cases after 1933.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/supreme_court/supreme_court2.cfm

You might also like